- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

how does it work
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

In article <Pine.3.05.9308091300.A5374-b100000(a)ra.cs.umb.edu> pbreton(a)cs.umb.edu writes: > 1) Aren't telnets logged, at least at the site you telnet to? If I "telnet > xxxx smtp", doesn't the site I telnet to have it in a log? I can't control > that, and that could identify me. *All* connections to any port can be logged. And if your site isn't entirely under your own control, your site can collude with the called site using the ident protocol to tell the other site the name of the user that the tcp/ip connection belongs to. If the other end has a smart SMTP, it can put this info in the received: headers. I do stuff like this myself using the LOG_TCP wrappers. G === Personal mail to gtoal(a)gtoal.com (I read it in the evenings) Business mail to gtoal(a)an-teallach.com (Be careful with the spelling!) Faxes to An Teallach Limited: +44 31 662 4678 Voice: +44 31 668 1550 x212

1 0

Beepers can also be used to track you down!
by koontzd＠lrcs.loral.com 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

>Basically, they'd send pings to your beeper throughout the city they expected >you in, then they'd find out which cell you were in. After that, they can >use a small radar-like gun to actually find your beeper, also by pings. >There's probably a way to disable the transmitter in the beeper, but I All you need is a faraday cage, an all metal enclosure with metal to metal contacts between all its surfaces. A Copper brillo type scrub pad, expanded out to make a pocket big enough for the pager.

3 2

Electric Fooling Machine
by Hastings＠courier8.aero.org 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

Homer: "You couldn't fool your own mother on the foolingest day of the year, even if you had an electric fooling machine." > *pragmatic* descriptions of Electronic Democracy ... You're walking down the street, and a gang of thugs jumps out from behind some bushes. Their leader approaches you and says: "Don't be alarmed, we're your very local community - we believe in the noble principle of Democracy, majority rule, and you have an equal vote with each of us." You say, "Whew. I guess my marshmallow-philosophical Libertarianism clouded my vision of the great ideal that is our American way of life. What should we vote on first?" The gang leader says, "Glad to hear someone with confidence in the system. A concerned member of our community, upset at the unfair distribution of wealth in our society, has proposed an equal sharing of whatever cash we have on hand at the moment. Since none of us have any cash, the implementation would require you to give an equal share to each of us. Now, that seems reasonable, doesn't it?" You say, "Oh no, my worst nightmare come true, even while I am awake! But, the essence of Democracy is my right to vote, and if I'm unhappy that I'm completely ruined this election, why I have a chance to get screwed every couple of years forever! But, wait, if this process were AUTOMATED, ELECTRONICALLY, why, I could be ripped off continuously every single nanosecond!" > and to my great chagrin all have been virtually completely > ignored... Could anyone really BELIEVE that high school civics class garbage? >I'm really quite amazed at all the deathly pessimism and antipathy >herein toward genuinely improving our governmental system. On this list, we've all probably experienced firsthand, the joys of "our" government in the person of an IRS (or state tax) agent, and after that enlightening encounter, have sworn uncompromising revenge on THEM, THE ENEMY. Maybe someone had their kid taken from them to die in some stinking jungle or desert. Or maybe someone owns a gun for protection, or has an unapproved hygienic practice (smoking, drugs, booze, midwife, health food) and isn't thrilled with the zero-tolerance, no-conviction-needed asset forfeiture revenue-enhancing scam, or the threats on privacy because of "money-laundering" or "terrorism". Can you stand to watch the "cleared by military censors" media prattle on about how government needs to stick everyone in a hamster cage for their own good without getting totally pissed? If so, I'm jealous. Now, what is the most effective tactic to achieve a universal respect for rights? Oops. Nobody has any rights, that would support Natural Law. We'd have to shovel heretics into the fire according to religious revelation if we accept NL/NR. Begging for our "rights" from the Secret Masters' puppets, or buying "our own" politicians into office, may bring temporary relief, but a lasting victory will come by cutting the supply lines (taxes and inflation) and their brainwashing stranglehold on the media (and "public" education). Digital cash might "nuke" tax collection, as Tim May puts it. Anything other than Federal Reserve Units as the unit of account removes the enemy's benefit from any inflation that occurs. Unlicensed broadcasts (perhaps starting with wireless spread-sprectrum internet extensions) muscles in on media territory and can cause reader/viewers to question the absurd establishment interpretations of current and historic events. >It seems everyone here is interested in debating the issue in >terms of how they see government, how it has functioned in the >past, *irrespective* of any novel mechanisms presented... Gee, if only the Nazis would have an e-mail address, everything would be wonderful. Email: hitler(a)nazi.edu or stalin(a)commie.org. >N. Szabo <szabo(a)netcom.com> [said:] >>* A basic problem with E.D. is that nobody has an >>incentive to vote correctly. A Nobel Prize was awarded to the Public Choice school for just this insight. The selfless, dedicated public servants have the same motivations as the most ruthless wolves on Wall Street. I think David Friedman covers this, and you could do worse than to read The Machinery of Freedom. (This is NOT a direct quote): A political victory is winner-take-all, completely shutting out the desires of a minority. In a free market, if a good or service is favored by the majority, guess what: The majority rules! You'll see whatever they want just about everywhere. But minority tastes will be catered to as well, perhaps not at the supermarket, but in a little boutique somewhere. >suppose that a `vote' is not something static but rather a >pledge of support for a proposal that can vary over time... If this is what you have in mind for political decisions, then you've reinvented proprietary communities, described in Spencer Heath McCallum's (sp?) The Art of Community (1970), which provides agreeable structures to the signatories of their covenants. But you would NOT be talking about the coercive, tax-and-draft, master-and-subject relationships which define a "government." Kent - <jkhastings(a)aol.com>

1 0

Re: Spooking of neural nets and image recognition...
by peb＠PROCASE.COM 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

>4) placing a magnet on the side of the camera (does this work?) Not with CCD cameras. All the other methods you mentioned require special physical access-- it won't work if one gets photographed while placing post-its on the camera window... The high error rates of image recognition make this whole scenario a future issue. One FAA funded experiment used mice to detect excessive adeneline (the mice go nuts or their heart rates increase just by smelling the excitement); the idea was to catch hijackers who would generally be a bit excited. This sounds obvious boneheaded because of all the people who fear flying...but the stated reason for abandoning the research was that mice don't rate too well as anonymous tipsters! Anyway, the error rate was very high too. However, the whole "profile" thing used by the WoD is essentially a conscious application of generalization that neural networks do. This may expand if "suspicion detection" is socially acceptable--my guess is that it would not be accepted given the speeding ticket automation systems that have been widely rejected (they probably could have gotten it accepted if the reduced a speeding ticket cost by a magnitude and considered it like a parking ticket--but these are legal changes, not technological changes, so they are much more difficult to do). The OCR of cash serial numbers would be highly probabilistic--that is, too many transactions would not be tracked so the knowledge of the flow would be partial. More likely would be that all large cash deposits would be scanned for general analysis just as large cash transactions require that a bank fill out a special form and send to the State. Paul E. Baclace peb(a)procase.com

1 0

Re: Re: anonymous contact ser
by Johan Helsingius 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

"M. Stirner" <M..Stirner(a)f0.n0.z1.fidonet.org>: > Uu> Here's why. I can't reply directly to your message, as some gateway on > Uu> the way barfs on the ".." in your name. This seems to come and go. > Uu> This is probably also what screws up anon.penet.fi. > > This is extremely interesting! This "problem" was supposedly fixed some > time ago, but this is why I have alternate accounts elsewhere with more > common names. In any event, I will pass this information along to the > proper persons. Well, having ".." in your username is *not* a good idea for most mail systems! > Yes, the zeros are wrong & were inserted by software out of my control. > I also have different addresses, true enough, but there is no f0.n0.z1 > in fido; that address is a software error. I suspect it'll be on this > message, too. Yeah. This is one of my pet peeves. PEOPLE WHO SEND OUT STUFF ON THE NET WITH NON-REPLYABLE FROM ADDRESSES SHOULD BE FORCED TO READ REC.HUMOR FOR A MONTH! So there! > STILL....the problem I have is not addressed: I cannot make a > multi-line header (as in the required "X-Anon-Password: password" line) > work through this UUCP gate, as far as I can tell. > I cannot use password > header lines unless anon.penet.fi can handle having blank lines between > the header fields: It can handle empty lines betwen the header proper and the X-Anon stuff, but not in between the X-Anon lines. > The above header will pass the UUCP gate here. Without the blank lines, > the header gets grunged after the To: anon(a)anon.penet.fi line. What brain-damaged (excuse the expression) gateway software are you using? Julf

1 0

Spooking of neural nets and image recognition...
by andrew m. boardman 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

With regard to the scope of surveillance cameras, the elevators in the GM building have cameras pointed down at an off angle; I thought they would be mostly useless until I was shown the (probably computer-modeled) contoured shell over the lens; on the far and, it produces a suprisingly broad and non-"fisheyed" view of anyone facing the front of the car. Image recognition is currently limited to a book of photos of people they (security) don't want in the building, though... When the real cost of such recognition systems is low enough that such run-of-the-mill rent-a-cops are looking to buy them, we've really got something to worry about. (How nice that Citibank credit card holders are all getting their faces digitized, for their security of course.) [cypherpunks content ends about here...] FYI, the George Washington Bridge carries much, probably most, of the traffic into Manhattan and New York City...) Most? Hardly. Don't forget the bridges and tunnels from Brooklyn and Queens, and the two tunnels from New Jersey, and... Someone I knew in grad school (they, not I) was doing surveys of Manhattan-NJ traffic, and measured some amazing throughput on the GWB, compared with the tunnels. I *was* being incredibly NJ-centric, though... andrew

1 0

Re: Electracy: Evil Revisited
by plmoses＠unix.cc.emory.edu 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

Sorry, but today's currency system is anything but a democracy. Thank God. It works because it is entrusted to a COMPETENT elite. The "global approval" of bills that you suggest seems to be to inevitably lead to the worst sort of populist rhetoric and pandering becoming law. You don't seem to recognize that in an age of irrationalism, opening the doors to mass participation any further will simply de-legitimize the system even more. (I suppose if you liked Motor Voter, you dont understand why I am saying this.) But look at the Constitution. Its paradigm is for a federal government of limited powers to function as the "glue" to hold together otherwise disparate political entities. The point is that majority rule is only *half* the story in American democracy; the other half is checks and balances to ensure that those who do not fit into the mainstream can pursue life, liberty,and happiness. Since you think I am blathering on in vague generalities, let me put it another way: Colorado's Amendment 2 is EXACTLY the kind of bill one would expect out of "Elektracy".

1 0

Software patents
by paul＠poboy.b17c.ingr.com 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

I want to bring this up in the context of the PGP vs PKP thread from a while back. I am personally interested, since my cryptophone software could conceivable infringe on several varied patents simply by using excerpted code from PGP. Background: the Association for Computing Machinery is the computer science equivalent of the ABA or the AMA. They are in the process of revising their code of ethics for ACM members. Several lumiaries (Guy L. Steele, Jr., Danny Hillis, Richard Stallman, Gerald J. Sussman, Marvin Minsky, John McCarthy, John Backus, and Fernando J. Corbato) wrote a letter objecting to the new clause. I have excerpted Turing Award winner, 1990 The original was posted to gnu.misc.discuss by jhawk(a)panix.com (John Hawkinson); he had RMS' permission, but I am reposting here without permission. Comments in {} are mine. begin included text The ACM recently adopted a "moral imperative" for its members to "Honor property rights including copyrights and patents." This is clause 1.5 of a new ethics code for ACM members, adopted in October 1992. ... ACM surveys suggest that most ACM members disapprove of having patents in software at all; yet the ACM moral imperative calls on members to honor what they may regard as a disaster for their field. [... spirit vs. letter of law ...] But the word "honor" has other implications. The spirit and practical effect of the ACM code is to endorse the current intellectual property system and discourage independent judgement about it. This directly opposes the views of many, perhaps most, ACM members. Not only that; it also distorts the patent system, by telling people not to exercise their rights in the system. After all, what does it mean to "honor" a patent? Whether a particular patent is valid and applicable is always an open question until decided by a court case. And it is never a crime to infringe a patent. If you think a patent is invalid, the legal system encourages you to disregard it; if you are not sued, then your actions are legitimate. If you are sued, then you are welcome to fight the case and see if you can overturn the patent. (This is so expensive that the possibility is purely theoretical for most of us, and it cannot solve more than a tiny fraction of the software patent problem, but some of the readers may work for companies that can afford to do so occasionally.) If you can do all that and still be "honoring" the patent, then "honoring" is an empty requirement which there is no way to violate. The reader is likely to dismiss this interpretation, based on the heuristic that every clause in the ACM code must have some practical import or it would have been deleted. If "honoring" a patent does not permit challenging it in that way, then the ACM is directing its members to treat all patents as valid and not exercise their legal right to challenge patents! [... remainder deleted ...] Now, IANAL, but the preceding is new to me. By the argument presented above PGP is legal w.r.t. patent infringment. Infringement is _not_ an unlawful act, and the question of whether or not PGP is infringing can only be settled by a court encounter between PKP and someone else. Theoretically, then, we are all safe unless PKP decides to take us individually to court. We are likewise safe should any of us- collectively or individually- write, distribute, or aid/abet thereof any code which might potentially infringe a patent. Sounds like innocent until proven guilty. Sounds like Schnorr and digital cash are fair game. -Paul "quote me" -- Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG | "Change the world for a better tomorrow. But perobich(a)ingr.com | watch your ass today." - aaron(a)halcyon.com Intergraph Federal Systems | Be a cryptography user- ask me how.

1 0

Re: Spooking of neural nets and image recognition...
by nfe＠scf.nmsu.edu 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

Nick Szabo writes: >[...]some general ideas for "encrypting" (sic) one's image: Some idea's are good, other's are abit off base. Major points of recognition are: jaw, cranium, nose, eyes, ears, age, and facial hair. Secondary points include: health, weight, optics, scars, etc. jaw: presence or lack of beards, highlighting skeletal lines, and hollows (aging) with makeup, or cigarette ash, plastic inserts in the cheeks, building up areas of the face with liquid latex, or morticians wax. (note that some of these techniques can be used on other areas of the face). cranium: hats, sudden changes in hair length/style, wigs (possably with padding). nose: highlighting/latex/wax - as with jaw, inserting a pair of small nuts/ buttons in the nose (drill for adequate airflow) will give the nose an appearence of having a "squashed/flattened" tip. 1/4 inch sections of stiff plastic tubing may also work. eyes: appear "sunken" w/ makup, altering eyebrows can misdirect eyesocket shape, pull back (oriental), or buldge out by pulling/gluing skin with spirit gum, or liquid latex. change color with tinted contacts. (note: sunken = old age, malnutrician, or sickness - pulling skin can also highlight cheekbones, etc.) ears: glue to the side of the head w/ rubber cement, spirit gum, or latex. age: 1) younger: very close shave, hot towles, alum, and talcum powder will tighten the skin, giving a youthfull appearence. 2) older: Max Factor hair whitener to grey temples, highlight lines and hollows of face (STUDY a stage makeup book, and prectice this before trying to fool anyone. Subtlety is the key with any realistic makeup, there is a tendency to over do it most of the time. As a rule of thumb cosmetic, and theatrical makeup is mostly worthless for disguise, and will not stand up to examination at close distances, unless well done, subtlely, and with extreme moderation.) facial hair: presence/absence, drastic changes in length, style and color can significantly alter ones appearence. Remember that neural nets, or a trained observer is going to be looking for the underlying skeletal shape, and building on top of that. health: depressed eye sockets, hollow cheeks, flush or jaundus (beta-kerotine) skin color. contra: exercise/good skin tone. Gaining or loosing weight, "sudden tan" type products... optics: glasses can hide features, and in some cases slightly alter the shape of the face. If unusual, they can be used as misdirection for an untrained observer (just like buttons, "loud" clothing, etc - as people tend to remember the unusual aspects, and not concentrate on usual features. Tinted contact lenses can change eye color. scars: hard to do right - use liquid latex, burns, cuts, etc. Probably best avoided, though very memoral to the observer, esp. if on the face. Misc: teath can be altered w/ iodine(stained), or blocked out with black wax. Have different "classes" of clothes (clergy, blue collar, white collar, "bum", etc - but stay in character. Remember that a construction worker isn't going to have an accountants hands, or imaculate tools, a bum will probably have dirt under their fingernails, etc. horizontal stripes make you look shorter/fatter, vertical ones taller/ skinnier. loud clothing, or pollitical buttons, a "funky" hat, etc will act as misdirection. skin acn also be bleached. consider: weight, muscle tone, stance, gait, etc. hair gell, and a curling iron are your friends :-)

1 0

NSA Seeks Delay in Clipper
by David Sobel 13 Aug '93

13 Aug '93

NSA Seeks Delay in Clipper Case The National Security Agency (NSA) has asked a federal court for a one-year delay in a lawsuit challenging the secrecy of the government's "Clipper Chip" encryption proposal. The suit was filed by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) on May 28 and seeks the disclosure of all information concerning the controversial plan. In an affidavit submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia on August 9, NSA Director of Policy Michael A. Smith states that NSA's search for records responsive to [CPSR's] request is under way, but is not yet complete. Because the Clipper Chip program is a significant one involving the participation of organizations in four of NSA's five Directorates and the Director's staff, the volume of responsive documents is likely to be quite large. Moreover, because the Clipper Chip program is highly complex and technical and is, in substantial part, classified for national security purposes, the review process cannot be accomplished quickly. CPSR called for the disclosure of all relevant information and full public debate on the proposal on April 16, the day it was announced. While NSA has insisted from the outset that the "Skipjack" encryption algorithm, which underlies the Clipper proposal, must remain secret, the Smith affidavit contains the first suggestion that the entire federal program is classified "in substantial part." In the interest of obtaining timely judicial review of the agency's broad classification claim, CPSR intends to oppose NSA's request for delay in the court proceedings. In another case involving government cryptography policy, CPSR has challenged NSA's classification of information concerning the development of the Digital Signature Standard (DSS). The court is currently considering the issue and a decision is expected soon. CPSR is a national public-interest alliance of computer industry professionals dedicated to examining the impact of technology on society. CPSR has 21 chapters in the U.S. and maintains offices in Palo Alto, California, and Washington, DC. For additional information on CPSR, call (415) 322-3778 or e-mail <cpsr(a)cpsr.org>. David L. Sobel CPSR Legal Counsel <sobel(a)washofc.cpsr.org>

1 0